About your Search

20121006
20121014
SHOW
Book TV 31
Today 25
Hannity 20
( more )
STATION
SFGTV 193
SFGTV2 127
FOXNEWSW 103
CNNW 102
FOXNEWS 102
CNN 101
MSNBC 93
MSNBCW 93
CSPAN2 71
FBC 63
CSPAN 59
WBAL (NBC) 47
WRC (NBC) 46
KGO (ABC) 40
KPIX (CBS) 39
KNTV (NBC) 33
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 1740
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 1,748 (some duplicates have been removed)
relates to the duties of office because the sheriff is the top law enforcement officer and also responsible for handling domestic violence programs within the county. now the commission believed -- the majority believed that while there was some room for debate as to whether this conduct or decency clause is limited by the relations to the duties clause, they found that it didn't matter. ultimately whether or not the decency clause is related to the duties of office in this case official misconduct had been shown. now, i've looked at this charter provision quite a bit so when i say things like conduct, clause, and decency clause, they mean something. perhaps -- not sure how much you all have looked at it. so i am going to borrow a definition that the parties ultimately agreed to, and this is a handout actually that i believe the mayor may have created. so this is the language of 15105e, but broken down in a way to identify theirs clauses within that section. it reads, official misconduct means any wrongful behavior by a public officer in relation to the duties of his or her offi
. particularly in swing states controlled by republican legislatures like pennsylvania's voter i.d. law. what is the purpose of that law again pennsylvania's republican house majority leader? >> voter i.d. which is going to allow governor romney to win the state of pennsylvania. done. >> jon: but hey -- (laughter). -- this is just between us chickens, right? huh? i mean, when the mics and the cameras go on pick a lock, you know what i'm talking about? pick a lock. what's that red -- okay, so it's on. as it turns out, the voter i.d. laws ostensibly set up to stop nonexistent inn-person voter fraud have the residual effect of disenfranchising and suppressing actual eligible voters. disproportionately of the minority, poor, and elderly variety or, as they are sometimes known, democrats. (laughter) of course, that law has been challenged in the courts and we are expecting a ruling -- (laughter). all right, just roll the ruling. >> we have breaking news right now. a judge has issued a decision in pennsylvania's controversial voter i.d. law. >> jon: all those without voter i.d. must gay marry whils
dissolution law, all of the payees associated with those contracts must be painfully lifted out, line item by line item, with source of funding on a schedule. that schedule is approved by the oversight board, the state department of finance every month. this test import -- jason indicated -- our surviving major redevelopment projects, equivalent to 20 billion, candlestick phase 1, and 2, mission bay, state -- transit center, all part of one redevelopment plan and other true wind-down activities honoring our commitment throughout the city whether in the third street bayview corridor, like a bankruptcy, wind down pay off the debt so the tax increment in the series is available for distribution to the taxing entities, city, county, bart, schools. free up the taxes generated for distribution to the other entities. in the case of san francisco we do have a lot at stake. a number of these area plans which the commission approved the board approved as i indicated, made or approved, hunters point, mission bay, trans bay, another obligations that need to be implemented, they are
consumption on the premise. so the san francisco law is very clear. there is no smoking indoors or outdoors for any type of establishment that serves food or beverages. and mr. ahmed the choice to violate the health code by allowing his patrons to smoke indoors even after our meeting, even after i denied the exemption application, and even the follow-up phone calls that we had in 2010. i also sent a notice to comply. that was in 2011. and then there were two notices of violations that were issued in february and may of this year. so because of the continued repeat violation, the department ordered a cease and desist of smoking inside of the cafe, also insisted the complete removal of all smoking products and smoking devices, and a 30 day suspension for the tobacco permit. now my last meeting with mr. ahmed was june 19, 2012 and he showed me his new product that he wanted to convert to, which is these rocks soaknd jis rin and the glycerin is infused with flavors. i went last night and wanted -- to observe the operations. so it was the same huka pipes being used, the smoking devic
there is an entire body of case law to look to for guidance that has weighed many kinds of different kinds of misconduct against the professional standards and responsibilities with the person who committed it, and determined the situations where there is a relationship and there isn't a relationship. and, frankly, if you think about the facts of this case, it's not a hard call. does committing a crime of violence against your wife and pleading guilty to it, and suffering a three-year criminal conviction relate to the subject matter of a chief law enforcement officer, who runs the jails and helps administer the correctional system in san francisco? yes. yes. upon that is not an unpredictable, vague, surprised relationship. yes, there's a clear subject matter relationship. most cases will be clear. there will be cases on the boundaries where, you know, the decision-makers are going to have to exercise judgment. but there's a three -- there's a tripar tight system with checks and balances to make sure that the decision is considered, and there is also court review after that, in case the --
the standard of conduct is for a chief law enforcement officer. so although the language of the charter seems broad, it -- i mean there's certainly a good argument that it is a single standard. at the same time, it needs to be interpreted -- and is susceptible to being interpreted as a standard that his office-dependent. and again that would require a fact-specific inquiry. you can't decide in advance, without knowing what has happened in a particular case, whether it's misconduct or not misconduct. it depends on the office. >> president chiu: colleagues, follow-up questions. supervisor farrell. >> supervisor farrell: thanks, president chiu. madam city attorney, to follow up on that line of questioning though, on one hand you say it should be easy to determine what is misconduct or not. on the other hand you say it's fact specific. i think commissioner hur's comments does that not invite subjectivity and gets us back to what the question is here, about clear delineation and having security and not the future abuse this potentially in the future, not to say anybody in this room or the current
, we strengthened the law, through a local ordinance. so this is not really anything new. this has been on the books for quite some time. the other thing i wanted to add is that even if there were no tobacco product being used in the hukas -- and i do believe that having the tobacco products there, open in a container, it would seem that it would be very likely that the customers would put the huka tobacco product on the hot stones if there are huka pipes present. that this is sort of similar to the phenomenon of electronic cigarettes, which now were recently banned by the airport commission and they're banned on airplanes. and this is even though there's no tobacco that is used in electronic cigarettes, the problem is that it gives the public the impression that smoking is permitted in areas where it's not permitted, and it also gives the impression to the public that there's no consequence to smoking in areas where smoking is not permitted. tobacco is still the number one cause of preventable deaths in the united states, and the two major factors that have reduced smoking in san franc
. many governments have yet to s pass laws enforcing the protocol. the participants are expected to discuss how to secure funding to meet the targets agreed. >>> military personnel from the united states and philippines have begun 11 days of joint exercises. the the drills began monday on the western coast m facing the south china sea. 3800 personnel are taking part in this year's exercises. that's 800 more than last year. a philippine know military suggest they reflect the numbers growing in the region. u the philippines is engaged in disputes with china. chinese patrol boats are preventing philippine fishing boats from approaching. u.s. leaders have expressed concern that china is expanding its activities in the region. >>> australian prime minister has urged japan to sign a free trade agreement with her country as soon as possible. she says no other fta will be more logical. he spoke at a reception in sydney. >> japan is a critically important economic partner for austr australia and will remain so in the future but in a dynamic and changing region it's time to take the next s
as solicitor general. nine years ago, they ruled 5 to 4 to uphold the university of michigan law schools limited use of affirmative action. and coming up next on c-span, oral arguments from last week's opening session of the courts full term. this case asks whether courts have jurisdiction to hear lawsuits and forge human rights abuses that occurred out -- for human rights abuses that occurred outside the country. this is an hour. >> we'll hear argument first this term in case 10-1491, kiobel v. royal dutch petroleum. mr. hoffman? >> mr. chief justice, and may it please the court, the plaintiffs in this case received asylum in the united states because of the human rights violations alleged in the complaint. they sued the defendants for their role in these human rights violations in u.s. general personal jurisdiction of our courts. abouts nothing unusual suing a tortfeasor in our -- >> may i ask you about the statement you just made? personal jurisdiction was raised as a defense, right? >> personal jurisdiction was raised as an affirmative defense, but not raised in a motion to dismiss.
practice. the laws in this area are strict compliance laws, and they are very specific. the federal law since 1990 indicates issues from 1998. all businesses, such as a grocery store, a dentist's office, restaurants, a doctor's office, virtually anything that a member of the public comes into the -- comes into needs to be a barrier-free. we will go over what barriers are. every public accommodation needs to be wheelchair-accessible. there are also other other forf disability. most of the issues we are hearing about are wheelchair accessibility issues. there is a small group of private individuals who are wheelchair-down that go around the city and they look at small businesses. and i dare say anybody in small restaurants have some accessibility issues. it is another attempt at making your building wheelchair accessible. i am not sure which of you may be merchants and which it may be landlords. the law applies to both. and that means you were 100% liable for any barriers to access and any damages that may be associated with those barriers. there are ways you can defend yourself. with yo
that and did you choose it in a way that the law would recognize. so the law all of the time develops concepts that scientists are interested in studying. it might be competency, for example. well, competency is really a multifaceted construct from a legal perspective. it could be competency to be executed, it could be competency to commit a crime. it could be competency to contribute to the decision as to whether voluntarily commit yourself to a mental hospital. it could be competency to participate in an abortion decision. so competency means many different things. the first thing you have to do as a scientist is ask the question, well, what does the law mean by it because if you want me to measure it, i have to somehow apply it. so going back to the question of free will, because a scientist can't operationally define it, they can't measure it, they're not really that much use to legal debates about free will. now, what does it mean on the legal side? i actually think the idea of free will or what is often referred to as volitional control plays a very big part in legal systems, but i think
a quick summary of the laws. the ada, calif. building code, the civil rights, and our experts here will elaborate. we also have a list of certified caps at work in san francisco for you. carla johnson with the mayor's office of disability has created a really good it died of out to interview your experts to make sure you are getting the best quality product for you. been next -- the money you pay for the inspection you can take as a tax deduction. any money that if you have taken can be applied as a tax deduction. this can be done on an annual basis. next, the opportunity, and a fund -- opportunity loan fund, providing for small businesses to pay for the inspection or to make improvements needed. to do it before you receive the lawsuit. and lastly, we of the bar association and their resources. they're providing their legal service for you. this last thing i am going to share with you in terms of what we have seen in our office is that with the individuals, that does not necessarily mean an individual will follow up with a lawsuit. what we've seen in our office is the individual's
processes and not/cbuu)áu or contort the law that we think best serveswj!or everyone. i will not be voting today to sustain the/ >> president chiu: supervisor:k wiener. >> supervisor wiener: thank you, ú?7t% %9q. >> president chiu: order please. : supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: thank you. this whole process i know has been incredibly%0b= hard for other than --c4í,÷ everyone involved especially being asked to judge a former colleague.4 and i am going to speculate that i don't think any of the 11 of us are goingwxas' to walk out of this room tonight feeling great, no matter what happens, no matter how weóçuon vote. this case has been incredibly messy on many, many levels. andp6f-7ñ will say that you know, in the community, thereÁare people whom i know, and who i respect, who feel very, very strongl$)i on both sides of this issue. and i think that reflects how difficulty this is. tonight, i will be voting to sustain the charges of misconduct in agreement with recommendation of the ethics co
misdemeanor conviction relates to the duties of the sheriff as a law enforcement officer. >> supervisor kim: so then you're adding to the test then the second portion of your test would be a relationship test, plus the ethics commission would have to determine that it falls below the standard of decency for that office. >in relationship to the sheriff's office, but if we were to assume that it is standards in relationship to your specific office, for the sheriff, it would be the relationship to his office, plus the -- what common sense would judge as falling before the standard of decency? this is where i get stuck is when does it fall below the standard of decency? a dui could be -- as a misdemeanor. you didn't hurt anyone per se, but you could have. you could have killed someone on the road, right? so i guess that's where i would like more clarity. when does it fall below the standard of decency for the sheriff, if we were to argue that there are standards? >> well, the mayor submitted the testimony of an expert, this person was the chief -- is william -- the chief of police of the san di
put --2eúÑ the public puts in public officials and the city law, and city law enforcement. we need toíy and balances in city government and how we're upholding the will of the voters. i think it goes without saying that no one here condones any form of domestp whether it is physical verbal or psychological abuse and all could havet )ñ been in play tonight. i'm proud as a city we have8ep )tátdomestic violence and what we can domestic violence in the future. ash£&ic officials we are expected to be models of good behavior and lawful behaviory,çgx while everyone knows none of us are perfect. there was reasonable expectation of greateroqt&3 scrutiny of public officials in our private practices. but this vote is not about affirming thatÑh$ what -- is not about affirming that we abhor all forms of domestic violence or;@6u )jt moral standards for elected officials. what we are here to decide is whether or not sheriff is guilty of official misconduct and thus8qoñ removal from offers. while the agents -- the commission > jf÷ñ 4-
son and daughter-in-law are expecting a boy in march; my granddaughter will have a little brother. finally more importantly, i did meet with project sponsor a couple of weeks ago in regards to 2830 toledo, i did have a chance to look at the plans and i'm happy to work with the dr requester and project sponsor to forge a compromise that will make it something that the commission can evaluate and find compromise. this will come back in november. i think there's a lot of potential there. >> congratulations. another line of antoninis in san francisco. commissioner woo. >> i want to announce that this saturday is affordable housing day in san francisco. there will be a number of tours. affordable, seniors, partnership between aia and the number of affordable housing developers.anyone that wants to stop by feel free. >> we can move onto directors reports. directors announcements and review of the board of supervisors, board of appeals in historic preservation commission. >> good afternoon. a couple of quick announcements. it was sent electronically, mm on the current status of
standards that are expected of a chief law enforcement officer. now, commissioner hur mentioned that the chief testified that any misdeed at all would be official misconduct, if committed by a sheriff. i don't think that's entirely accurate. i think what the chief testified to is that -- is that the sheriff is expected, under the professional and ethical standards associated with his particular office, to avoid most forms of dishonesty, that behavior -- accountability, being a poor role model. there are many kinds of wrongful behavior that don't rise to the level of criminals that are wrongful for a sheriff. but at the end of the day, i don't think -- i think you're posing the more difficult question than the relationship test. your question is when is the -- when is the misconduct severe enough that we should consider it official misconduct. and that isn't a function of the relationship test. conduct may relate to the duties of office without being so severe that it should rise to the level of official misconduct. i think that that -- the charter does not offer you an answer to
, medicine, or any ethical code that i know of or the bible, for that matter for our criminal law tdistinguishing between those wo have alcohol and tobacco and people who put other substances in their body. there is no legitimate basis for distinguishing between the alcoholic on the one hand under criminal law and between the drug addict on the other. that is first. the second ethical point is i hope most of you agree with this. i do not believe that anybody should be punished simply for what we put into our own bodies absent harm to others. nobody deserves to be punished for what we put in our bodies absent harm to others. hurt somebody, yes and not tell me your addiction was the excuse. we need to be regarded as sovereign over our minds and bodies. the criminal law should not be treating anyone as a criminal for what we put in here. when one is trying to pursue a particular public health or public safety objective, reducing the harm of drugs or whatever it might be. and when you have powerful evidence that a non-course of system can accomplish that public safety health objective
identifying ways our ethic laws could be strengthened. as supervisors, what if anything would you propose to strength the city's ethics laws. i will start with mr. davis. >> strong ethic laws are essential. what is happening with our sunshine task force and hope davis can speak to this since she recently served on the task force. these need to be strengthened and one problem we have is around enforcement. i would like to see more of the ethical violations of larger committees, some of which are operating, for instance, in some shady areas of law. one was the run he ed run, the committee for mayor ed lee last year and the campaigns that aren't swaying the politics of city, the way the run ed run campaign did. so i think that is one the issues and improving our good government and ethic laws in san francisco. >> miss breed, would you like to address the question? do you want me to repeat it? >> yes. >> sure. a recent chief civil grand jury report, at the request of supervisor campos the city conducted a comparison of laws identifying ways our ethic laws could be strengthened. as su
that some future mayor will be -- not by the rule of law but the temptation to remove a political adversary. removing an elected while not in office iscq.c4 not justice. if any case cry out for a bright line rule, for a clear and unambiguous application for the law to the fact it is this case. i will turn it over to shepherd kopp. thank you. >> president chiu: will remind members of the public, the first rule of this chamber is for members of the public not to express either applause or other statements. thank you. mr. kopp. >> thank you. good afternoon, members of the board, president. i'm shepherd kopp and along with mr. wagner i've been representing sheriff ross mirkarimi during these proargs. i want to discuss why we strongly believe that we don't need to draw from other jurisdictions as the mayor has, in order to arrive at a definition of official misconduct, that works in san francisco, and that is workable. and that has been tested. and the reason that we have come back time and again to the case involving commissioner mazzola is because, in that case, we saw board of supervisors sit
law and theory as to freedom of action versus freedom of choice, i think it it actually is quite compatible across both if we simply separate what it is we're talking about, a difference between your preferences and desires over which you may not have control versus action choices and in law, we punish you for bad actions, not for bad preferences and desires. so then the question is, how do we take account for preferences and desires that may be outside of your control? that may be things like gray matter lighten kent showed us that showed us that people like psychopaths have decreased gray matter in particular regions of their brain. it could be something like the guy who he was talking about out of virginia who had the large tumor in his brain and chose to act on but didn't have control over having the tumor in his brain. how do we take account for that in law? that's, i think, the interesting struggle that neuroscience presents us with, but it doesn't change the issue of free will. in fact, we have just as robust of evidence from neuroscience that supports this concept of acti
by melanie eversley later. you probably heard what happened in pennsylvania regarding their voter i.d. law and we will talk to her about that. we also want to take time to let you know that on our other channels on the weekend, book- tv and american history tv, we look at cities across the united states. our focus this time around is augusta, maine. not only do you get a sense of meeting the people and learning about individual cities and what makes them interesting, here is a little bit of a preview from tonight's program. [video clip] >> this is the first parish church in brunswick, maine. it is significant to the story of a uncle tom's cabin. in many ways, the story began here. it is here in pew #23 that harriet beecher stowe, by her account, saw the vision of uncle tom being whipped to to death. he is the title character, the hero of her 1852 novel," uncle tom's cabin." the story is that there is -- there was a slave, a good slave, sold by his first kind owner, mr. shelby, and he sold him to pay debts on his plantation through a series of misadventures, you might say, he ends up in the
. legislation that we have before us strengthens an existing law, to restrict this practice known as hotel evasion. in 1981 the passage of the apartment conversion ordinance, which is second, 41-a of the administrative code made it illegal for residential propertis with four or more units to be occupied pore for less than 30 days. unfortunate le what we have found in recent years there has been a problem that has persisted due to enforcement challenges and a loophole in the law. in recent years we have seen many corporations sidestep this law by signing long-term loiss with property owner ises that their non-san franciscan employees can use the apartment as short-term corporate housing or tourism residential housing. so for example, as an example, in my district, the tenants at the large golden gateway [kph-efpl/] have experienced corporate employees and guests that come in and out of their buildings just like a hotel. based on rent board record there's are an estimate of dozens of these units that are leased by corporate entities. this not only creates quality of life issues for neighbors
you can. the law has a bright line. it says if you engage in a wongful action, there is a defense called the insanity defense which never works as most of us know because we don't recognize it. should we recognize it, that's an interesting question. should we have a more robust concept of diminished responsibility in light of the understanding that some people have less control over their preferences and desires or should we have better sentencing schemes or get rid of incarceration and come up with different models of trying to deal with punishment once we understand people have wrong selections. i think those are all interesting questions, but is there free will? well, the fact that almost everybody in the audience raised either their right or left hand contemplated it and were quickly able to act and respond. that to me says, yes, there is. now what do we want to do about it? now that we understand that those of us in the audience or up here that like chocolate cake may not have control over it, how do we want to account for that if at all in the criminal justice system? to dat
line. there are many bright lines in the law. now again not every law is susceptible to a bright line but by and large i think it does benefit the public when the laws are clear so that they can easily be followed. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. >> president chiu: supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim: you somewhat addressed this already when you said that it may be challenging for you to address the actual relationship to the office that was determined by the majority of the commission, but since you were sent to represent the commission i thought i would ask, so having read the transcripts several times actually the one question that was not answered to me is what exactly is the relationship to the office? i heard a couple of examples such as the sheriff runs our domestic violence programs and he committed an act of domestic violence. from your understanding of the majority of the commission is that the relationship, or was there another kind of clear delineation of what that relationship to the office was, for specifically counts 4 and 5? >> supervisor kim, i think that was the relati
their charges, a law enforcement official, or a public official could rob banks on their way to their inauguration, and there's nothing that anybody could do about it. well, there's a couple of points that i'd like to make about that. number one is the charter of san francisco, while an admirable document, is not perfect. in fact, there's no provision in the charter that permits anyone to remove the mayor for official misconduct. the only way a mayor can be removed is by recall, or defeat in the next election. so the mayor could commit a first degree murder, and not be removable, unless the voters decide to take matters into their own hand and remove him. the mayor has also made the argument that this removal provision,ka@u 15.105, is a valuable, speedy and effective tool. and they want you to do the work, that the voters might have to do if they were to decide to launch a recall election. well the voters have decided to launch a recall election, thateÑ issue would be decided next month. so their argument that this is procedure is not borne out byk5p the facts and the length
of sheriff includes not just the direct oversight of programs in thexs- those who have broken the law. this criminal" completely related to the official duties of the sheriff. and it isib how deputy sheriffs, who are not bpj4(p&c"p% allowed to commit crimes while they're off duty to keep their jobs are askedi?z1e to abide by one standard and not require the sheriff, their boss, to abide by that same standard. secondly as i think through the3]ez arguments of the sheriff's lawyers, they have been very good arguments it's hard for me to agree with the suggestion that somehow this is a personal act of misconduct but not official misconduct, that we are only responsible for what happens from 9:00 to 5:00 when we sit in our public office. as public officials, and<:q0z when we ran to be public officials, i think we knew that we are held to a different standard given our position.pí'0$@&c"p% it's also hard for me to agree that a public official somehow@/:uÑ immune with this conduct, just because it happened after election day but befc1a s
to suspend the sheriff was without basis in the law and why you must ultimately reinstate the sheriff. ross mirkarimi campaigned on the power of redemption. he's been a key proponent of restorative justice in this city. but there is no question that on december 31st, 2011, ross mirkarimi made a serious and terrible mistake. and how did he deal with that mistake? he immediately apologized to his wife. he entered into counseling. he apologized to the people of san francisco. he pled guilty to a criminal offense. all of that underscores the responsibility that rossq]j terrible mistake that he made on new year's eve last year. and as a result of that mistake, several months from his wife and son. he was suspended without pay, with no means to provide for hi family. his entire life's work was destroyed almost in an instant. he's beenwácf described by the r and the mayor's attorneys with the most inflammatory and prejudicial rhetoric, yet at the end of the day, the punishment does not fit theyxúw crime. this afternoon, i'm going to spend a fe7%g minutes telling u about why this case is differ
onzo0eñ the innuendo and comments that have been made. we decide this casee24ne based on the law that governance official misconduct, including. the charter provisions that control it, and based on theam1sidence presented. and if you look at the facts and aç the law, it is clear that there are two possiblel+lcm interpretations of what official misconduct and while i understand and respect the position that has been articulatedí
a proposed law that would reduce felony drug possession crimes to a misdemeanor. this is what 13 states have done. we not only bring these issues to the forefront, but have the opportunity to participate -- and we have cards that you could fill out and questions. this promises to be a year of reform and change like we have never seen, and we now see prisoner reentry programs being implemented. we're still spending too much money and resources and not enough on rehabilitation and reentry. this november, the voters will decide on limiting the three strikes law. issues and measures long overdue. it is clear there is much more that needs to be done. according to a study that was published this month -- since 1989, 2000 people have been wrongfully incarcerated and they served collectively, 10,000 years. an average of 11 years person. i would like to thank the people who made this summit possible. memoranda -- amy devon -- many volunteers and all of our speakers and panelists. i would like to thank the co- sponsors, and the bar association of san francisco. i would like to thank them for their hel
on together but he proactively came for this bill, s.b. 1506, to say that he's been law enforcement for 30 years and bring back 30-year experience to this consideration of this bill, and he said this bill makes sense because drug treatment works and this is in spite of the fact we'll be battling the district attorneys along with many other arms of public safety. [laughter] >> we've got the data, we've got the facts and we know this will provide great benefit to our communities, to our neighborhoods, and to all of california. thank you for your support. [applause] >> tal, i want to go back to the question that marty posed earlier, which is in effect this idea that in order to incentivize people making the decision to seek treatment that the fear of a felony conviction or possible state prison sentence could play a positive role. you talk to a lot of people charged with crimes who are trying to make the decision of what decision to make, what is the primary motivation you see coming from them. how do they decision make on dispositions related to drug possession as a felony? >> i think that f
and 10% of coastal and marine areas by 2020. but many governments have yet to pass laws enforcing the protocol. some developing countries say they can't afford to implement the policies. the apartments participants are into it. >>> have begun 11 days of joint exercises. the drills are taking place near islands at the center of a territorial dispute between china and the philippines. the drills began monday on the western coast of luzon island facing the south china sea. 3,800 personnel are taking part in this year's exercises. that's 800 more than last year. a filipino military leader suggested the numbers reflect a growing security threat in the region. >> and i'm confident that they shall result in the partnership that is enduring that we shall be prepared to face the present and emerging maritime challenges in this part of the region. >> the philippines is engaged in territorial disputes with china over the islands. chinese patrol boats are preventing philippine boats from reaching the shore. >>> australian prime minister hatz urged japan to sign a trade agreement. gillard spok
right have been denied by an oppressive law that says in order for churches to qualify for tax-exempt status they are absolutely printd from directly or indirectly participating in or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for elective public office. folks, this law is just another example of obama's war on religion. which he cleverly passed in 1954. (laughter) but now some brave religious leaders have banded together to fight for their right to partyfy fill united nations. >> stephen: some one thousand pastors nationwide are preparing to deliver a sermon the i.r.s. may not want to hear. they're trying to draw attention to a 1954 tax code that prohibits tax-exempt organizations like churches from engaging in political endorsements a group known as the i ay lines defending freedom is now challenging the code claiming it violates preacher's right for free speech. >> they've marched october 7 as pulpit freedom sunday. >> yes, pulpit freedom sunday. when the thrill of lengthy sermons finally meets the excitement of tax policy. pulpit fr
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 1,748 (some duplicates have been removed)